JP5169980B2 - Degradation diagnosis method for sealing materials - Google Patents

Description

  The present invention relates to a deterioration diagnosis method for diagnosing deterioration of a sealing material filled in an outer wall joint of a building such as a house.

  Generally, the sealing material for building is filled in the joint part of the outer wall of a building such as a house for the purpose of ensuring the waterproof performance. This type of sealing material gradually loses its flexibility and becomes hard due to the effects of external environment such as ultraviolet rays, heat, rainwater, etc., and the repeated fatigue of small expansion and contraction accompanying temperature change. There are drawbacks such as cracking and interfacial destruction (interfacial debonding, adherend destruction, etc.). For this reason, the deterioration of the sealing material is periodically diagnosed, and when the deterioration has progressed, maintenance such as repair or replacement is performed.

  Conventionally, for example, the following method has been adopted for diagnosing the deterioration of the sealing material filled in the outer wall joints of a building. First, there is a method of grasping the degree of deterioration by visually observing the occurrence of cracks on the surface of the sealing material. Secondly, there is a method in which the surface hardness of the sealing material is measured using a hardness meter such as a durometer, and the degree of deterioration is grasped from the measurement result.

  Third, press the surface of the sealing material strongly with a finger or a wooden spatula, etc., and check the degree of deterioration by checking whether there is a breakage at the bonding interface between the sealing material and the adherend (outer wall material edge). There is a method (see Non-Patent Document 1).

  Fourthly, the sealing material is cut into a string while leaving the root portion with a cutter, etc., and the cut string-like sealing material is pulled by hand until it breaks, and the elongation at that time is measured and broken. There is a method of grasping the degree of deterioration by observing the state (see Non-Patent Document 1). In this case, a method for measuring the tensile strength with only a spring or the like can be seen.

  Fifth, the specimen is sampled by partially cutting the sealing material with a cutter or the like, and the specimen is brought back to the laboratory and sliced into layers, and after the appearance inspection is performed on the sliced specimen, There is a method of grasping the degree of deterioration by conducting a physical property test such as a hardness test or a tensile test (see Non-Patent Document 2).

Refer to page 115 of the “Japan Sealant Handbook (2008)” issued by the Japan Sealant Industry Association. Refer to pages 202 to 208 of “Technical Guidelines for Watertight Design and Construction of Exterior Wall Joints and Explanations (2008 Edition)” issued by the Architectural Institute of Japan.

  As a sealing material for building used in recent years, many cracks are hardly generated on the surface due to the improvement of weather resistance, and it is difficult to cause cohesive failure. On the other hand, the increase in the modulus at the time of deterioration tends to increase the burden on the adhesion interface with the outer wall material edge surface, and as a result, interface destruction (interfacial peeling, outer wall material edge surface damage, etc.) tends to occur.

  For this reason, when diagnosing deterioration of building sealants that have been used in recent years, a method that focuses on confirming the risk of interface failure rather than a method that focuses on confirming the risk of cracking. Is increasingly desired.

  Here, when considering the first to fifth methods described above, among these first to fifth methods, there are third to fifth methods capable of grasping the adhesion between the sealing material and the outer wall material edge surface. It is in line with the deterioration diagnosis of the sealing material for building used in recent years.

  However, in the third method, the degree of deterioration cannot be quantified, and there is a problem that the diagnosis results are likely to vary depending on the force applied when pressing the surface of the sealing material with a finger or a wooden spatula. there were.

  Further, in the fourth method, it is necessary to observe the fracture state while measuring the elongation amount while breaking the string-like sealing material, and the degree of deterioration cannot be easily quantified. However, there is a problem that it is easily influenced by the experience of the observer. Moreover, the sealing material cannot be easily returned to the original state after diagnosis, and a repair work by a specialist is required.

  Furthermore, in the fifth method, it is necessary to perform a troublesome process such as visual inspection and physical property test after performing processing such as slicing the test specimen brought back to the laboratory in a layered manner, and the degree of deterioration can be simplified. There is a problem in that it cannot be quantified and the diagnostic result cannot be obtained immediately in the field. In addition, since it is necessary to collect a relatively long specimen, the sealing material cannot be easily returned to the original state after diagnosis, and a repair work by a specialist is required.

  Therefore, the present invention solves the above-mentioned problems and easily quantifies the degree of deterioration of the sealing material, while simplifying the risk of interface breakage in the vicinity of the adhesive interface between the sealing material and the outer wall material edge surface. It is an object of the present invention to provide a method for diagnosing deterioration of a sealing material that can be confirmed easily and can be easily repaired after diagnosis.

  The present inventor can easily predict the risk of interfacial failure on site, instead of the conventional method that causes various problems such as directly confirming the adhesion between the sealing material and the outer wall material. As a result, we found that the hardening of the side surface (surface in the joint depth direction) of the sealing material due to deterioration over time has a great influence on the occurrence of interface failure. Based on this, the present invention has been completed.

  That is, the method for diagnosing deterioration of a sealing material according to the present invention is intended for diagnosing deterioration of the sealing material 3 filled in the outer wall joint 2 of a building, and the test is performed by partially cutting the sealing material 3 from the outer wall joint 2. The bodies 20 and 22 are collected, and the hardness of at least the cut side surfaces 21 and 23 of the test bodies 20 and 22 is measured.

  Specifically, of the cut side surfaces 21 and 23 of the test bodies 20 and 22, the hardness of the portions 21 a and 23 a that face the small face surfaces 4 and 4 of the outer wall material 1 and 1 constituting the outer wall joint 2. Is measuring.

  Moreover, the said sealing material 3 is cut out over the joint width W1 full length, and the said test bodies 20 and 22 which have width W2, W3 equivalent to the said joint width W1 are extract | collected. Further, a cylindrical cutting tool 10 having an annular blade 11 at the tip is pushed from the surface of the sealing material 3 to collect the columnar test body 20. Furthermore, the hardness of the cut side surfaces 21 and 23 of the test bodies 20 and 22 is measured using a durometer 30 on site.

  According to the sealing material deterioration diagnosis method of the present invention, the degree of hardening of the side surface portion of the sealing material, which greatly affects the occurrence of interface failure near the adhesion interface between the sealing material and the outer wall material edge, is determined by the degree of deterioration of the sealing material. In order to determine the degree of hardening, the hardness of the cut side surface of the specimen obtained by partially cutting out the sealing material is measured using a durometer, etc., so the degree of deterioration of the sealing material can be simplified. While quantifying, the risk of interface failure can be easily confirmed on site.

  In addition, when measuring the hardness of the cut side surface of the test body in this way, it is not necessary to use a long test body for measuring the amount of elongation or performing a tensile test. It can be kept small. Therefore, the sealing material can be easily returned to the original state only by injecting the sealing material into the cutout portion, and the repair work after the diagnosis can be easily completed.

  Further, by measuring the hardness of the portion of the cut side surface of the test body that faces the small edge surface of the outer wall material, the risk of interface fracture can be grasped more accurately. Furthermore, by collecting a specimen having the same width as the joint width of the outer wall joint, or by collecting a cylindrical specimen using a cylindrical cutting tool, a substantially constant width is obtained regardless of the sampling location. A specimen having (thickness) can be obtained, and it is not necessary to correct the measured hardness, and the hardness measurement can be performed accurately and stably.

It is a principal part cross-sectional view of the outer wall part of a house. It is a perspective view which shows the extraction | collection operation | work of a cylindrical test body. It is the principal part cross-sectional view similarly. It is a perspective view which shows the hardness measurement operation | work using a durometer. It is a perspective view which shows the collection operation | work of a rectangular parallelepiped test body. It is a perspective view which shows the hardness measurement operation | work using a durometer.

  Hereinafter, embodiments of the present invention will be described in detail with reference to the drawings. FIG. 1 shows an outer wall portion of a house in which an outer wall joint portion 2 between outer wall materials 1 and 1 is filled with a wet architectural sealant 3. The outer wall materials 1 and 1 are made of, for example, a concrete plate material, and the outer wall joint portion 2 is constituted by the side end surfaces (small edge surfaces) 4 and 4 thereof. The sealing material 3 is made of, for example, a silicone sealant. The sealing material 3 is injected into the outer wall joint portion 2 in a paste state and solidifies while adhering to the small edge surfaces 4 and 4 of the outer wall materials 1 and 1, thereby sealing the outer wall joint portion 2. It is like that. Reference numeral 5 denotes a backup material made of, for example, a soft resin that receives the sealing material 3.

  The sealing material 3 filled in the outer wall joint portion 2 is excellent in weather resistance, has a feature that it is difficult to generate cracks on the surface, and is difficult to cohesive failure. Rises and the burden on the bonding interface between the outer wall materials 1 and 1 and the edge surfaces 4 and 4 of the outer wall material 1 and 1 increases, resulting in interface destruction (interfacial separation and destruction of the outer wall materials 1 and 1 edge surfaces 4 and 4) Tends to occur. One index for predicting the risk of such interface fracture includes the hardness of the side surface (surface in the joint depth direction) of the sealing material 3 that increases with age as shown in Table 1.

  Therefore, in the deterioration diagnosis of the sealing material 3 described above, it becomes an index for predicting the risk of interface fracture rather than measuring the surface hardness of the sealing material 3 which is an index for predicting the risk of cracking. The side hardness of the sealing material 3 is measured.

  Hereinafter, the deterioration diagnosis method for the sealing material 3 will be described in detail. First, using the cutting tool 10, as shown in FIG. 2, the sealing material 3 is partially cut out from the outer wall joint part 2, and the test body 20 is extract | collected.

  The cutting tool 10 is formed in a cylindrical shape having an outer diameter substantially equal to the joint width W <b> 1 of the outer wall joint part 2, and the tip part thereof is an annular blade part 11. And as shown in FIG. 3, the annular blade part 11 of this cutting tool 10 is pushed in until it reaches the surface of the backup material 5 from the surface of the sealing material 3, thereby making the sealing material 3 substantially the full length of the joint width W1. A cylindrical test body 20 having a width (diameter) W2 substantially equal to the joint width W1 is sampled. The cutting tool 10 has a handle 12 attached to the rear end thereof, but is not limited to such a structure. For example, the cutting tool 10 has a mounting shaft that can be attached to a drill driver attached to the rear end. May be.

  Next, as shown in FIG. 4, the hardness of the cut side surface 21 of the collected specimen 20 is measured on the site using a hardness meter such as a durometer 30. In this case, it is desirable to measure the hardness of the portions 21 a and 21 a facing the small face surfaces 4 and 4 of the outer wall material 1 and 1 constituting the outer wall joint 2 in the cut side surface 21 of the test body 20. Since these parts 21a and 21a are close to the adhesive interface between the sealing material 3 and the outer wall materials 1 and 1 and the facets 4 and 4 of the outer wall material 1, by measuring the hardness thereof, the risk of interface breakage can be improved with higher accuracy. This is because it can be grasped.

  The durometer 30 has a structure in which a push needle urged by a spring (not shown) protrudes from the center of the lower end of the outer case 31, and the hardness is determined from the amount of biting of the push needle pressed against the cut side surface 21 of the test body 20. Is supposed to be detected.

  Here, since the hardness of the measurement object depends on the thickness of the measurement object, if the thickness of the measurement object varies, it is necessary to correct the measured hardness accordingly. When the hardness of the surface of the sealing material 3 is measured in the filled state as in the conventional second method, the depth of the sealing material 3 corresponding to the thickness of the object to be measured depends on the leveling and filling at the time of filling. Depending on the amount, it is not constant, and the influence of the back-up material 5 is also taken into account. Therefore, the hardness varies easily depending on the measurement location, and the depth of the sealing material 3 is unknown even when the hardness is corrected. Therefore, there is a problem that the reliability of the measured hardness is low. Moreover, even if the sealing material 3 is partially cut out from the outer wall joint portion 2 and the specimen 20 is collected, when the hardness of the surface of the specimen 20 is measured, the specimen still corresponding to the thickness of the measured object The depth of 20 is often different depending on the sampling location and is not constant, and there is a problem that the necessity of correcting the measured hardness is high.

  On the other hand, when measuring the hardness of the cut side surface 21 of the test body 20 cut out in a columnar shape as described above, the width (diameter) W2 of the test body 20 corresponding to the thickness of the measured object is a cylindrical cut. Since it is the same as the inner diameter of the tool 10 (substantially equal to the joint width W1) and is substantially constant regardless of the sampling location, it is not necessary to correct the measured hardness, and the hardness measurement is performed with high accuracy and stability. be able to.

  Then, after measuring the hardness of the cut end face 21 of the test body 20, the degree of cure of the side surface portion of the sealing material 3 is determined by comparing the measured hardness value with a reference hardness value obtained in advance through experiments or the like. Thus, the risk of interface breakage in the vicinity of the adhesion interface between the sealing material 3 and the small edge surfaces 4 and 4 of the outer wall materials 1 and 1 is predicted.

  According to the above-described deterioration diagnosis method, the interface near the bonding interface between the sealing material 3 and the outer wall materials 1 and 1 on the small edge surfaces 4 and 4 while easily quantifying the degree of deterioration of the sealing material 3 at the site. The risk of destruction can be easily confirmed. In addition, simply by spot-injecting a new sealing material into the cut-out part of the test body 20, the sealing material 3 can be easily returned to the original state before the cutting, and the repair work after diagnosis can be done easily. be able to.

  The present invention is not limited to the above embodiment, and it is needless to say that many modifications and changes can be made to the above embodiment within the scope of the present invention.

  For example, in the above embodiment, the cylindrical test body 20 is collected using the cylindrical cutting tool 10, but as shown in FIG. 3 may be cut out over substantially the entire length of the joint width W1, and a rectangular parallelepiped test body 22 having a width W3 substantially equal to the joint width W1 may be collected. As shown in FIG. 6, among the cut side surfaces 23 of the test body 22, the hardnesses of the portions 23a and 23a facing the small face surfaces 4 and 4 of the outer wall materials 1 and 1 are measured with a hardness meter such as a durometer 30. What is necessary is just to measure using. In this case as well, the measured hardness is corrected because the width W3 of the specimen 22 corresponding to the thickness of the measured object is substantially the same as the joint width W1 and is substantially constant regardless of the sampling location. Therefore, the hardness measurement can be performed accurately and stably.

  Further, when the deterioration of the sealing material 3 is diagnosed, not only is the hardness of the cut side surfaces 21 and 23 of the test bodies 20 and 22 used as an index for predicting the risk of interfacial breakage, but also the risk of cracking is predicted. It is also possible to simultaneously measure the hardness of the surfaces of the test bodies 20 and 22 serving as an index for confirming the risks of both interface fracture and cracking.

  1 ·· Outer wall material 2 ·· Outer wall joint portion 3 ·· Sealing material 4 ·· Small edge 10 · · Cutting tool 11 · · Ring blade portion 20 · 22 · · · Specimen 21, 23 · · · · Cut side surfaces, 21a, 23a · · Cut side surfaces, 30 · · Durometer, W1 · · Joint width, W2 and W3 · · Specimen width

Claims (5)

A deterioration diagnosis method for diagnosing deterioration of a sealing material (3) filled in an outer wall joint (2) of a building, wherein the sealing material (3) is partially cut out from the outer wall joint (2) The specimens (20) and (22) are collected, and the hardness of at least the cut side surfaces (21) and (23) of the specimens (20) and (22) is measured. Method. Of the cut side surfaces (21) and (23) of the specimens (20) and (22), facing the small edge surfaces (4) and (4) of the outer wall materials (1) and (1) constituting the outer wall joint portion (2). The method for diagnosing deterioration of a sealing material according to claim 1, wherein the hardness of the parts (21a) (23a) that have been measured is measured. The sealing material (3) is cut out over the entire joint width (W1), and the specimens (20) and (22) having a width (W2) (W3) equivalent to the joint width (W1) are collected. The deterioration diagnosis method for a sealing material according to claim 1 or 2. A cylindrical cutting tool (10) having an annular blade (11) at the tip is pushed from the surface of the sealing material (3) to collect the columnar specimen (20). 4. A method for diagnosing deterioration of a sealing material according to any one of 3 to 3. The sealing material according to any one of claims 1 to 4, wherein the hardness of the cut side surfaces (21) and (23) of the test specimens (20) and (22) is measured on site using a durometer (30). Degradation diagnosis method.